Bernsohn v. State Dormitory Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bernsohn v. State Dormitory Authority

33 A.D.2d 550, 304 N.Y.S.2d 637, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3014

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 23, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 33 A.D.2d 550 (Bernsohn v. State Dormitory Authority) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bernsohn v. State Dormitory Authority, 33 A.D.2d 550, 304 N.Y.S.2d 637, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3014 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered April 11, 1969 unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements, and the motion to restore the action to the calendar denied. This action to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff in December, 1959 through the negligence of defendants was commenced in February, 1964. In December, 1965 a note of issue was filed without a statement of readiness. The action was dismissed (CPLR 3404) on January 3, 1967. Some two years later, in January, 1969, plaintiff moved to restore the case to the calendar. We conclude that the granting of such relief was an improvident exercise of discretion. The principal excuse proffered was that the statement of readiness was not filed through clerical error of the attorney and that such oversight was not discovered until some three years later. Such an excuse is insufficient (Sortino v. Fisher, 20 A D 2d 25, 29). Concur — Stevens, P. J., Eager, Tilzer, McNally and Bastow, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order entered April 11, 1969 unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements, and the motion to restore the action to the calendar denied. This action to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff in December, 1959 through the negligence of defendants was commenced in February, 1964. In December, 1965 a note of issue was filed without a statement of readiness. The action was dismissed (CPLR 3404) on January 3, 1967. Some two years later, in January, 1969, plaintiff moved to restore the case to the calendar. We conclude that the granting of such relief was an improvident exercise of discretion. The principal excuse proffered was that the statement of readiness was not filed through clerical error of the attorney and that such oversight was not discovered until some three years later. Such an excuse is insufficient (Sortino v. Fisher, 20 A D 2d 25, 29). Concur — Stevens, P. J., Eager, Tilzer, McNally and Bastow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 550, 304 N.Y.S.2d 637, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3014, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bernsohn-v-state-dormitory-authority-nyappdiv-1969.